Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

ACWI vs MOAT: how they differ

ACWI and MOAT hold 13% of their weight in the same names, and ACWI returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF and VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ACWI and MOAT hold 13% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ACWI and MOAT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingACWIMOAT
MICROSOFT3.38%2.79%
NVIDIA4.89%2.58%
BROADCOM INC1.59%2.23%
AMAZON.COM INC2.38%1.36%
META PLATFORMS CLASS A1.38%1.29%
APPLIED MATERIAL INC0.35%1.41%
PALO ALTO NETWORKS0.27%2.40%
THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INC0.22%1.36%
AMPHENOL CORP CLASS A0.19%1.31%
PEPSICO0.18%1.14%
WALT DISNEY0.18%1.25%
CHARLES SCHWAB0.17%2.75%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ACWIOnly in MOAT
APPLE 4.67%Brown-Forman Corp 2.39%
ALPHABET CLASS A 1.90%Tyler Technologies Inc 2.37%
TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING 1.86%Clorox Co/The 1.98%
ALPHABET CLASS C 1.50%Jack Henry & Associates Inc 1.50%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY 1.08%Guidewire Software Inc 1.29%
TESLA INC 1.02%Domino's Pizza Inc 1.18%
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 0.92%Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc 1.13%
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS LTD 0.91%Marketaxess Holdings Inc 1.02%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Sep 10, 2026.

ACWI and MOAT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
MOAT
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesVanEck
What it isMSCI ACWIMorningstar Wide Moat
Total return, 1 year+19.1%+11.3%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.6 pts−6.2 pts
Expense ratio0.32%0.46%
Already in the S&P 50061.4%91.6%
Holdings163055

ACWI in plain words

ACWI is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI ACWI. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +19.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.32% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 61% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1630 positions, with the top ten at 24.6%.

MOAT in plain words

MOAT is an index equity fund tracking the Morningstar Wide Moat. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +11.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.46% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 55 positions, with the top ten at 27.1%. It sat 5.7% below its high of Aug 27, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ACWI or MOAT?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ACWI returned +19.1% and MOAT returned +11.3%, so ACWI returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ACWI or MOAT?
ACWI charges 0.32% a year and MOAT charges 0.46%, so ACWI is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ACWI and MOAT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 61% of ACWI and 92% of MOAT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 13% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

ACWI against MOAT, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, ACWI against MOAT, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/acwi-vs-moat Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources